
Sword&Sorcery |

Eh, they're big girls, if they want to get offended, they can do so without a big strong man to get all offended on their behalf. Patriarchy is dead.
The female gamers I've played with, even going back 20 years to college, have been very heavily biased towards playing fighters (rangers, barbarians, archers) and killing the holy hell out of anything that looks at them funny. Role-playing occurs sometimes in the process, but they sure don't play Bards or Druids or fruity Toreador!
The only female gamer I've played with who played a Bard was into girls, if yanno what I mean.
All of the Druid players have been dudes.
On the other hand, it seems like only the girls want to play Rogues. In a couple decades of D&D/GURPS/etc. I can count the number of guys playing Rogues on one finger, while we've had a couple of the girls try one out.
As for the logic that 4E is 'reaching out to girl gamers' and then specifically saying that they are removing the classes 'traditionally played by girls' from the 4E launch? Yeah. That takes some flexibility.
Me likes Fighter. Me hack & slash. *chuckles*
My brother used to be our DM, and he hated me for playing the thief or fighter back in 2ed.! (wizards were too frail for me. I used to kill myself several times if I played one).All in all, those questions are only offensive because they seem to think of us as tiny and fragile, poor girls lost in that big bad world of D&D, with all those dribling guys ready to kill your fragile pink-wearing druid/bard (clutching a teddy bear, of course. For protection only). ¬¬